linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 3/4 v2] ide: Implement disk shock protection support

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <200809181747.31715.bzolnier@gmail.com>
Date:	Thu, 18 Sep 2008 17:47:31 -0700
From:	Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com>
To:	Elias Oltmanns <eo@...ensachen.de>
Cc:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>,
	Randy Dunlap <randy.dunlap@...cle.com>,
	Tejun Heo <htejun@...il.com>, linux-ide@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/4 v2] ide: Implement disk shock protection support

On Thursday 18 September 2008 17:28:05 Elias Oltmanns wrote:
> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz <bzolnier@...il.com> wrote:
> > On Wednesday 17 September 2008 09:38:37 Elias Oltmanns wrote:
> >> On user request (through sysfs), the IDLE IMMEDIATE command with UNLOAD
> >
> >> FEATURE as specified in ATA-7 is issued to the device and processing of
> >> the request queue is stopped thereafter until the specified timeout
> >> expires or user space asks to resume normal operation. This is supposed
> >> to prevent the heads of a hard drive from accidentally crashing onto the
> >> platter when a heavy shock is anticipated (like a falling laptop expected
> >> to hit the floor). Port resets are deferred whenever a device on that
> >> port is in the parked state.
> >> 
> >> Signed-off-by: Elias Oltmanns <eo@...ensachen.de>
> >
> > applied
> 
> I'm very sorry for responding so late to Tejun's concerns but I got
> bitten by the uaccess bug in recent linux-next discussed on LKML.
> 
> @Bart, one isue raised by Tejun actually applies to this ide patch as
> well. Even though the problem is considerably more complex in the libata
> case than I had bargained for, we are lucky in the ide case. Still, we
> need to move prepar_to_wait() to the top of the while loop. Can you
> please include the following interdiff? It also gets rid of a
> superfluous variable.

done, thanks!
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/